In defense of Rather's documentary

From Thom Hartmann:
IMHO, and to use an old cliché, we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. This raised the topic and put it on the MSM screen. That’s an important step. Even half-done documentaries are needed to get a national discussion going that may eventually bring all the rest of us into the conversation…
Thom
From Bruce O’Dell:
Yes, agreed, the Rather documentary missed the mark. To anyone who
understands the fundamental technology issues, an interview with Michael
Shameless (oops, I meant “Shamos”, my bad) is an exercise in maddening lies
and disinformation – it was painful to watch. And as you might expect from
someone who has made a substantial consulting income “certifying” voting
machines since 1984 – rather than fulfilling the ethical imperative to
advocate they be banned – he utterly ignores the vast catalog of proven
vulnerabilities, and Rather let him get away with it.

Still, Rather does seem to question the optimism about whether a techno-fix
is possible in his next segment; by making the case the Sequoia punch card
technology was deliberately subverted – like the quality of the ES&S touch
screens was deliberately subverted – it certainly supports his final point
that “trust us” is an unreasonable request when it comes to voting
machines.

Rather does not quite take the final logical steps, of course – to openly
call into question the outcome of recent elections, as well as the obvious
step of banning the machines – but in terms of his mainstream media peers,
I’ll give him a “C+”. Even if imperfect, every one of these reports helps
to shift the center of gravity of public awareness a little closer to the
tipping point.

-Bruce

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *